Originally posted by Spnw07:There are some Buddhist concepts that say 3 periods of time are illusions of the deluded mind. And what's academic and non-academic in your view? Please elaborate.
i feel that you are on the academic side of looking at things happen .I wont see thats correct enough ,because its looking at things without considering the 3 periods of time (past , present ,future )
Please look carefully what i posted and what you translate is a different thing.
I am saying that you could have seen the issue from a academic point of view.that no such thing as miracles and totally chronological and reflexive
I say ,
unless you have developed meditative power to ascertain the true cause of things
else you could be just plain guessing .
And if you are the Buddha ,would you want to take the sufferings of the sentient beings ?
Do you feel as a Buddha ,sufferings is inherent of this existence and doing so only bring about more clinging for sufferings .
Who to relieve their sufferings ? is it the ten disciples ? is it the deva who is immediately going to plunge to earth after the end of its existence in heaven ?
Maybe you can tell me why u misread my reply to you .thanks
Originally posted by Spnw07:I beg to differ that everybody starts with the noblest intentions. But I thank you for giving those examples.
The problem is that everybody would want to think they have started from the point of selflessness, and is therefore practising compassion.
Ever heard the phrase"The road to hell is paved with good intentions"?
The problem lies not from where they started, but their interpretations of "good" and "bad". Somewhere down the way, it becomes "good"vs "bad".
One way of reconciling, is attack the issue, not the person.
Another thing, when I was younger, releasing animals"fan shen" is good, now with more awareness, I realise it may be bad, not only for the animals released but also the fauna and flora in the environment it is released. Having said that, I still think releasing is good, only more thought have to be put into it. In other words, in a helpful,positive manner!
Originally posted by Weychin:There a sensation of pain registered by the mind and mental anguish
Also physical pain can be blocked, by the adrenalin rush in times of danger, also a person goes into shock with extreme trauma,eg. broken bones.
A martial artist can block pain using chi, the blood withdraws from peripheral into the core, leaving the skin with a cold clammy sensation. The pain will return later, unfortunately, same with spiritual possessions with mediums and "shen da" spiritual kungfu. Chi can also be to speed up healing.
Illnessis also called dis-ease, manifested as discomfort. The difference is how one react to discomfort, some will moan and groan"I want to die already". We instinctively give words of comfort although it will not cure the ailment, we comfort to make the person feel and deal with the discomfort better.
The physical pain never goes, but mental agitation is lessen.
Ever missed or skipped a meal even though you are hungry, if preoccupied, hunger pangs usually goes away after a while. In an affluent world, we are usually not starving, yes, we feel do hungry, but is usually the overreaction to hunger, the gorging of food. Constant craving is usually symptomatic of something else!
Another thing I forgot to add is the placebo effect, it show the body can heal itself, although not in all cases!
Originally posted by bohiruci:
i feel that you are on the academic side of looking at things happen .I wont see thats correct enough ,because its looking at things without considering the 3 periods of time (past , present ,future )
Please look carefully what i posted and what you translate is a different thing.
I am saying that you could have seen the issue from a academic point of view.that no such thing as miracles and totally chronological and reflexive
I say ,
unless you have developed meditative power to ascertain the true cause of things
else you could be just plain guessing .
And if you are the Buddha ,would you want to take the sufferings of the sentient beings ?
Do you feel as a Buddha ,sufferings is inherent of this existence and doing so only bring about more clinging for sufferings .
Who to relieve their sufferings ? is it the ten disciples ? is it the deva who is immediately going to plunge to earth after the end of its existence in heaven ?
Maybe you can tell me why u misread my reply to you .thanks
I'm afraid I can't understand what you are trying to say here. But thanks for clarifying anyway.
Originally posted by Spnw07:The explanation you gave for the stabbing example assumes that the doer is suffering. But he could be enjoying the act of killing, without thinking that the other person is the cause of his suffering.
I don't think anyone will kill for fun unless they are mentally deranged or psychotic. Any kind of seeking, whether it is to seek for money, fame, or just the thrill of killing people, implies a seeker/sought, subject/object, duality. Because of their apparent sense of lack in their life, they want to get rid of it by resorting to sick things to derive pleasure. The imagined gap between a perceiving subject and a perceived pleasurable sensation (object) causes the seeking, and also is the root cause of suffering. In any case such behavior falls under "Pain and pleasure, suffering and satisfaction always seem to be “over there.” Thus, when pleasant sensations arise, there is a constant, compassionate, deluded attempt to get over there to the other side of the imagined split. This is fundamental attraction. "
When they derive pleasure from killing others, that is also a form of attachment which is very perverted in nature.
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
I don't think anyone will kill for fun unless they are mentally deranged or psychotic. Any kind of seeking, whether it is to seek for money, fame, or just the thrill of killing people, implies a seeker/sought, subject/object, duality. Because of their apparent sense of lack in their life, they want to get rid of it by resorting to sick things to derive pleasure. The imagined gap between a perceiving subject and a perceived pleasurable sensation (object) causes the seeking, and also is the root cause of suffering. In any case such behavior falls under "Pain and pleasure, suffering and satisfaction always seem to be “over there.” Thus, when pleasant sensations arise, there is a constant, compassionate, deluded attempt to get over there to the other side of the imagined split. This is fundamental attraction. "
When they derive pleasure from killing others, that is also a form of attachment which is very perverted in nature.
Hmm...we as normal human beings, cannot fully discern at all times, whether someone is killing for fun as a result of mental derangment or psychotic act up. We can only presume it to be so, as part of our rational thinking.
If you exclude serial or psychotic killers, you would still be able to find real-life cases of people killing for fun - for example - the interrogation of prisoners of wars using various methods of torture.
On a smaller scale, bullying in various forms at work and school. Bullying may not necessarily involve the loss of human life immediately, but if not handled well, it will lead to severe depression, and for some, suicide becomes the only way to ease their pain permanently. So bullying is another kind of 'killing', or shall I say, 'emotional killing' - only more indirect. Bullying incidents which do not involve physical violence as the main observable appearance, can be just as damaging, but yet very difficult to detect.
It is common knowledge now that some Iraq prisoners of wars were brutally humiliated and tortured by some US prison wardens. This is something that happened in the recent years.
Are these US prison wardens necessarily mentally deranged or psychotic? We cannot know for sure. Does or should such preliminary, surface judgment mitigate their liability of their deeds? I don't really know.
But thanks for sharing.
Originally posted by Spnw07:Hmm...we as normal human beings, cannot fully discern at all times, whether someone is killing for fun as a result of mental derangment or psychotic act up. We can only presume it to be so, as part of our rational thinking.
If you exclude serial or psychotic killers, you would still be able to find real-life cases of people killing for fun - for example - the interrogation of prisoners of wars using various methods of torture.
On a smaller scale, bullying in various forms at work and school. Bullying may not necessarily involve the loss of human life immediately, but if not handled well, it will lead to severe depression, and for some, suicide becomes the only way to ease their pain permanently. So bullying is another kind of 'killing', or shall I say, 'emotional killing' - only more indirect. Bullying incidents are less easily or likely to be detected unless repeated physical violence is involved.
It is common knowledge now that some Iraq prisoners of wars were brutally humiliated and tortured by some US prison wardens. This is something that happened in the recent years.
Are these US prison wardens necessarily mentally deranged or psychotic? We cannot know for sure. Does or should such preliminary, surface judgment mitigate their liability of their deeds? I don't really know.
But thanks for sharing.
in the case of the abu ghrabi prisoners incidents, a very detailed study can be read in the book i mentioned in an earlier post <the lucifer effect> by Dr Zimbardo. he reasons with previous studies that environmental conditions shapes the behavior of human in very strong ways and that any human being is capable of such cruel acts because of such environmental conditions.
as im reading this book, i can very clearly relate the theories in the book and connect with the buddhism teachings. it is exactly the dualistic nature of our perceptions that influence a person's perception of such environment conditions leading to extreme actions. take for example u mentioned bullying. first the environmental conditions must be that to facilitate 'the bullying' to happen. a quiet student sitting among many quiet students will not create the environment as condusive as a quiet student sitting among many noisy students (im assuming here). then it only requires a noisy student to start interacting with the quiet student to create further conditions. how it can lead to bullying really is dependent on the intepretation of the situations shaped by the dualistic nature of our thoughts and actions.
of cos from your posts i have a feeling (pls clarify if im wrong) that ur looking for a fit all 'answer' to all the negative behaviors in this world. as AEN has explained in the posts, dualistic views of object/subject split is the main cause of such behavior. however from personal experience its not easy to fully experience this dualistic/non-dual nature. for a start probably some conceptual understanding is required (which i suppose is the reason ur asking here), it builds the required scaffoldings of our understanding and the conditions to further our practice.
Originally posted by Spnw07:
I'm afraid I can't understand what you are trying to say here. But thanks for clarifying anyway.
Originally posted by Spnw07:
I'm afraid I can't understand what you are trying to say here. But thanks for clarifying anyway.
Welcome .
but your ideas abit ... my advice is u should do some realisation practice
Originally posted by geis:in the case of the abu ghrabi prisoners incidents, a very detailed study can be read in the book i mentioned in an earlier post <the lucifer effect> by Dr Zimbardo. he reasons with previous studies that environmental conditions shapes the behavior of human in very strong ways and that any human being is capable of such cruel acts because of such environmental conditions.
as im reading this book, i can very clearly relate the theories in the book and connect with the buddhism teachings. it is exactly the dualistic nature of our perceptions that influence a person's perception of such environment conditions leading to extreme actions. take for example u mentioned bullying. first the environmental conditions must be that to facilitate 'the bullying' to happen. a quiet student sitting among many quiet students will not create the environment as condusive as a quiet student sitting among many noisy students (im assuming here). then it only requires a noisy student to start interacting with the quiet student to create further conditions. how it can lead to bullying really is dependent on the intepretation of the situations shaped by the dualistic nature of our thoughts and actions.
of cos from your posts i have a feeling (pls clarify if im wrong) that ur looking for a fit all 'answer' to all the negative behaviors in this world. as AEN has explained in the posts, dualistic views of object/subject split is the main cause of such behavior. however from personal experience its not easy to fully experience this dualistic/non-dual nature. for a start probably some conceptual understanding is required (which i suppose is the reason ur asking here), it builds the required scaffoldings of our understanding and the conditions to further our practice.
geis i totally agree.
Originally posted by Spnw07:Hmm...we as normal human beings, cannot fully discern at all times, whether someone is killing for fun as a result of mental derangment or psychotic act up. We can only presume it to be so, as part of our rational thinking.
If you exclude serial or psychotic killers, you would still be able to find real-life cases of people killing for fun - for example - the interrogation of prisoners of wars using various methods of torture.
On a smaller scale, bullying in various forms at work and school. Bullying may not necessarily involve the loss of human life immediately, but if not handled well, it will lead to severe depression, and for some, suicide becomes the only way to ease their pain permanently. So bullying is another kind of 'killing', or shall I say, 'emotional killing' - only more indirect. Bullying incidents which do not involve physical violence as the main observable appearance, can be just as damaging, but yet very difficult to detect.
It is common knowledge now that some Iraq prisoners of wars were brutally humiliated and tortured by some US prison wardens. This is something that happened in the recent years.
Are these US prison wardens necessarily mentally deranged or psychotic? We cannot know for sure. Does or should such preliminary, surface judgment mitigate their liability of their deeds? I don't really know.
But thanks for sharing.
Years ago there was documentary about some US students role playing as prison wardens and inmates. It started quite innocently, everybody being self concious and fooling around. As the inmates keep fooling around, and the wardens when losing control, became frustrated and started being more abusive and brutal, until they became very physical and treated the inmates as they were real convict or"scum". The inmates were also demoralised and degraded and adopted a subservient role of real inmates.
The project was abruptly terminated by the authorities for obvious reasons. These people are not true enforcers or convicts, only students! Things just escalated !Scary huh?!!
Originally posted by geis:in the case of the abu ghrabi prisoners incidents, a very detailed study can be read in the book i mentioned in an earlier post <the lucifer effect> by Dr Zimbardo. he reasons with previous studies that environmental conditions shapes the behavior of human in very strong ways and that any human being is capable of such cruel acts because of such environmental conditions.
as im reading this book, i can very clearly relate the theories in the book and connect with the buddhism teachings. it is exactly the dualistic nature of our perceptions that influence a person's perception of such environment conditions leading to extreme actions. take for example u mentioned bullying. first the environmental conditions must be that to facilitate 'the bullying' to happen. a quiet student sitting among many quiet students will not create the environment as condusive as a quiet student sitting among many noisy students (im assuming here). then it only requires a noisy student to start interacting with the quiet student to create further conditions. how it can lead to bullying really is dependent on the intepretation of the situations shaped by the dualistic nature of our thoughts and actions.
of cos from your posts i have a feeling (pls clarify if im wrong) that ur looking for a fit all 'answer' to all the negative behaviors in this world. as AEN has explained in the posts, dualistic views of object/subject split is the main cause of such behavior. however from personal experience its not easy to fully experience this dualistic/non-dual nature. for a start probably some conceptual understanding is required (which i suppose is the reason ur asking here), it builds the required scaffoldings of our understanding and the conditions to further our practice.
If there is indeed a fit all 'answer', it would be the one that has been frequently mentioned by AEN - dualistic views and so on.
I'm asking not just for the sake of conceptual understanding.
I'm looking for Buddhists or people who can help with the conceptual understanding of important Buddhist teachings in ways that are skilful.
Thank you for your reply.
Originally posted by Spnw07:If there is indeed a fit all 'answer', it would be the one that has been frequently mentioned by AEN - dualistic views and so on.
I'm asking not just for the sake of conceptual understanding.
I'm looking for Buddhists or people who can help with the conceptual understanding of important Buddhist teachings in ways that are skilful.
Thank you for your reply.
The mind's world view, is referenced with 'I' as reference, with values keep on changing as we constantly evaluate conciously or unconciously the events in front of us with our "I" world view, it's like a theory, everything is alright as long as it is consistent with the theory(mind's world view), but when inconsistencies keep cropping up and disturbs our "world view" that we take stock and start asking questions! Remember, our world view is all inclusive and serve a guiding principle in how we deal with everything!
Originally posted by Spnw07:If we are preoccupied, hunger pangs do usually go away after a while. However how long can we continue to keep ourselves preoccupied without having to feel hungry again?
Example, people who are usually preoccupied will find that after some time, hunger does not trouble them, but in the long term they may develop gastric pains.
So using mental training to suppress hunger or pain isn't practical?
Hunger has two components, physical and mental.
Physical hunger has to be addressed physically, like the poverty stricken Haitians, who ate mud to supplement their diet. Nutritionally not ideal, but help keeps the stomach full.
I not sure exactly, but, the gastric pains it not independantly attributted to hunger or lack of food. People who have gastric pains usually leads a hectic and stressfull live style.
There are yogis who meditated and fasted for long periods of time, probably have to check with them whether or not they develop gastric pains! Heh!Heh!
Originally posted by Spnw07:I beg to differ that everybody starts with the noblest intentions. But I thank you for giving those examples.
The problem is that everybody would want to think they have started from the point of selflessness, and is therefore practising compassion.
Forget me if I sounded sweeping and condescending! But the point I am put forth is that most if not all, do not think the are committing wrong or injustice to someone else or being,
It is either a case of;hey! it's not right but look, everybody is doing it, I shall reserve my kindness and to only those who deserve it, not those scums, even death is too good for them! Or count yourself yourself unlucky that you met me!
Where do we draw the line; who deserves my kindness and who does'nt. Personally, if I can let go and forgive, all the better for me,for then I will have no residual anger, Once anger stops, healing can begin.Unable to forgive holding a grudge,which ultimately affects me more than my aggressor.
If I can't, then, at least the aggressor will receive his comeuppance by the law. If possible, the full brunt of the law! Most people requires this type of closure. The question is, is a criminal, once a criminal always a criminal? The hurt he/she cause is real, and also also the propensity to hurt again is always there! So how do we weigh the issues?!!
If I can let go, the sooner the better,for I will have no hangups, sleep more soundly with no nightmares at night. I stopped being the victim!
Originally posted by Spnw07:
What is wholesome and unwholesome in various real-life scenarios is still vague to me, that is why I'm going into specifics.
I think...
Buddha already sets a basic guideline with the 5 precepts. We can relate some of real-life scenarios with the 5 precepts.
The 5 precepts are...
1) Don't kill
2) Don't steal - to rid people of their possessions.
3) No false speech.
4) No sexual misconduct
5) No intoxicants
When one observes 5 precepts, it also means that one is not committing these five kinds of evil deeds. You are preventing oneself from commit harm to others and cultivating good at the same. Keeping the 5 precepts will prevent oneself from falling into the lower realms.
There are many benefits in keeping the 5 precepts.
1) Do not kill. One must not deliberately kill any living creatures, either by committing the act oneself, instructing others to kill, or approving of or participating in act of killing. It is a respect to others' lives.
One should not deprive others (animals not excluded) of the right to live. If one is hurt or killed, one's family, relatives, friends will suffer. It is the cause of rebirth in Three Evil Paths. The effect of killing to the performer are brevity of life, ill health, handicapped and fear.
In observing the first precept, one tries to protect life whenever possible. Furthermore, one cultivates the attitude of loving kindness to all beings by wishing that they may be happy and free from harm.
2) Do not steal. It is a respect to other's properties and the right to own property. If something is not given, one may not take it away by stealing, by force or by fraud. Besides these, one should avoid misusing money or property belonging to the public or other persons. In a broader sense, the second precept also means that one should not evade one’s responsibilities. If an employee is lazy and neglects the duties or tasks assigned to him, he is, in a way, "stealing" time that should have been spent on his work.
In its broadest sense, observing the second precept also means that one cultivates the virtue of generosity. A Buddhist gives to the poor and sick because of their need. He makes offerings to the monks, nuns and masters because he respects the qualities they possess. He is generous in his gifts to his parents, teachers and friends because of the advice, guidance and kindness they have shown him.
Besides giving material things to the needy and the worthy, Buddhists should also offer sympathy and encouragement to those who are hurt or discouraged. It is said, however, that the best of all gifts is the gift of the Dharma in the form of teaching it or in the production and distribution of Buddhist books.
Greed is one of the Three Poisons, which leads us to attachment and suffering. The bad effect of stealing are poverty, misery, disappointment, etc.
3) No sexual misconduct like committing adultery which damage relationships, inflict harm to oneself and others; lead to loss of harmony in family etc.
4) No false speech. To refrain from telling lies is to show respect for the truth. No good can come from telling lies, be it out of fun or malice. When a Buddhist observes the fourth precept, he refrains from telling lies or half-truths that exaggerate or understate, and instead cultivates the virtue of truthfulness. Once people uphold the respect for truth, there will be fewer quarrels and misunderstandings and fewer cases of false accusations in the courts of justice. Society will then become more peaceful and orderly.
5) No intoxicants. Buddhism emphasises wisdom. Taking intoxicant will descend and lose the seed of wisdom. Intoxicants, such as drugs, liquor, smoking, etc., are harmful to health. It seems that taking intoxicant is not hurting others. However, if we are drunk and lose our consciousness, we may easily commit evil deeds and hurt others. Therefore, one who breaks this precept will tend to break all other precepts along with it.
The fifth precept is based on respect for mental health. It guard against the loss of control of one’s mind. It is particularly important to those who meditate because, by refraining from taking intoxicants, they can more easily cultivate awareness, attention and clarity of mind. Thus the observance of the fifth precept not only contributes to happiness in the family and peace in society, it also prepares a person for the practice of Mental Development.
Life may not be clear-cut sometime and there may not be a standard model solution to answer all questions but generally observing the 5 precepts are basic guideline. Right view will arise when we cultivated morality, samadhi and wisdom.
Originally posted by Isis:
I think...
Buddha already sets a basic guideline with the 5 precepts. We can relate some of real-life scenarios with the 5 precepts.
The 5 precepts are...
1) Don't kill
2) Don't steal - to rid people of their possessions.
3) No false speech.
4) No sexual misconduct
5) No intoxicants
When one observes 5 precepts, it also means that one is not committing these five kinds of evil deeds. You are preventing oneself from commit harm to others and cultivating good at the same. Keeping the 5 precepts will prevent oneself from falling into the lower realms.
There are many benefits in keeping the 5 precepts.
1) Do not kill. One must not deliberately kill any living creatures, either by committing the act oneself, instructing others to kill, or approving of or participating in act of killing. It is a respect to others' lives.
One should not deprive others (animals not excluded) of the right to live. If one is hurt or killed, one's family, relatives, friends will suffer. It is the cause of rebirth in Three Evil Paths. The effect of killing to the performer are brevity of life, ill health, handicapped and fear.
In observing the first precept, one tries to protect life whenever possible. Furthermore, one cultivates the attitude of loving kindness to all beings by wishing that they may be happy and free from harm.
2) Do not steal. It is a respect to other's properties and the right to own property. If something is not given, one may not take it away by stealing, by force or by fraud. Besides these, one should avoid misusing money or property belonging to the public or other persons. In a broader sense, the second precept also means that one should not evade one’s responsibilities. If an employee is lazy and neglects the duties or tasks assigned to him, he is, in a way, "stealing" time that should have been spent on his work.
In its broadest sense, observing the second precept also means that one cultivates the virtue of generosity. A Buddhist gives to the poor and sick because of their need. He makes offerings to the monks, nuns and masters because he respects the qualities they possess. He is generous in his gifts to his parents, teachers and friends because of the advice, guidance and kindness they have shown him.
Besides giving material things to the needy and the worthy, Buddhists should also offer sympathy and encouragement to those who are hurt or discouraged. It is said, however, that the best of all gifts is the gift of the Dharma in the form of teaching it or in the production and distribution of Buddhist books.
Greed is one of the Three Poisons, which leads us to attachment and suffering. The bad effect of stealing are poverty, misery, disappointment, etc.
3) No sexual misconduct like committing adultery which damage relationships, inflict harm to oneself and others; lead to loss of harmony in family etc.
4) No false speech. To refrain from telling lies is to show respect for the truth. No good can come from telling lies, be it out of fun or malice. When a Buddhist observes the fourth precept, he refrains from telling lies or half-truths that exaggerate or understate, and instead cultivates the virtue of truthfulness. Once people uphold the respect for truth, there will be fewer quarrels and misunderstandings and fewer cases of false accusations in the courts of justice. Society will then become more peaceful and orderly.
5) No intoxicants. Buddhism emphasises wisdom. Taking intoxicant will descend and lose the seed of wisdom. Intoxicants, such as drugs, liquor, smoking, etc., are harmful to health. It seems that taking intoxicant is not hurting others. However, if we are drunk and lose our consciousness, we may easily commit evil deeds and hurt others. Therefore, one who breaks this precept will tend to break all other precepts along with it.
The fifth precept is based on respect for mental health. It guard against the loss of control of one’s mind. It is particularly important to those who meditate because, by refraining from taking intoxicants, they can more easily cultivate awareness, attention and clarity of mind. Thus the observance of the fifth precept not only contributes to happiness in the family and peace in society, it also prepares a person for the practice of Mental Development.
Life may not be clear-cut sometime and there may not be a standard model solution to answer all questions but generally observing the 5 precepts are basic guideline. Right view will arise when we cultivated morality, samadhi and wisdom.
Thanks for the above guidelines. I do know them. I'm asking not for a standard model solution to answer all questions. If there is, the Buddha would have long ago given us one instead of speaking on different life issues as they occur.
The problem is, conflicts or dilemmas do not wait till we have cultivated morality, samadhi and wisdom. They come usually, when we are most weak or unstable, spiritually, emotionally or otherwise.
Thanks again for sharing.
Originally posted by Weychin:Forget me if I sounded sweeping and condescending! But the point I am put forth is that most if not all, do not think the are committing wrong or injustice to someone else or being,
It is either a case of;hey! it's not right but look, everybody is doing it, I shall reserve my kindness and to only those who deserve it, not those scums, even death is too good for them! Or count yourself yourself unlucky that you met me!
Where do we draw the line; who deserves my kindness and who does'nt. Personally, if I can let go and forgive, all the better for me,for then I will have no residual anger, Once anger stops, healing can begin.Unable to forgive holding a grudge,which ultimately affects me more than my aggressor.
If I can't, then, at least the aggressor will receive his comeuppance by the law. If possible, the full brunt of the law! Most people requires this type of closure. The question is, is a criminal, once a criminal always a criminal? The hurt he/she cause is real, and also also the propensity to hurt again is always there! So how do we weigh the issues?!!
If I can let go, the sooner the better,for I will have no hangups, sleep more soundly with no nightmares at night. I stopped being the victim!
Although one may have stopped being the victim, it somehow does not necessarily translate into protecting others proactively. It's more like indirect protection by being spiritually or emotionally calm and collected.
The questions I'm asking is something like what you have raised in the criminal example.
"The hurt he/she cause is real, and also also the propensity to hurt again is always there! So how do we weigh the issues?!!"
These are my concerns for there are no easy answers. Even though there aren't, such deep issues don't or won't stop me from searching and reflecting on real-life examples as they occur, be it either experienced personally or through others.
Originally posted by Isis:
I think...
Buddha already sets a basic guideline with the 5 precepts. We can relate some of real-life scenarios with the 5 precepts.
The 5 precepts are...
1) Don't kill
2) Don't steal - to rid people of their possessions.
3) No false speech.
4) No sexual misconduct
5) No intoxicants
When one observes 5 precepts, it also means that one is not committing these five kinds of evil deeds. You are preventing oneself from commit harm to others and cultivating good at the same. Keeping the 5 precepts will prevent oneself from falling into the lower realms.
There are many benefits in keeping the 5 precepts.
1) Do not kill. One must not deliberately kill any living creatures, either by committing the act oneself, instructing others to kill, or approving of or participating in act of killing. It is a respect to others' lives.
One should not deprive others (animals not excluded) of the right to live. If one is hurt or killed, one's family, relatives, friends will suffer. It is the cause of rebirth in Three Evil Paths. The effect of killing to the performer are brevity of life, ill health, handicapped and fear.
In observing the first precept, one tries to protect life whenever possible. Furthermore, one cultivates the attitude of loving kindness to all beings by wishing that they may be happy and free from harm.
2) Do not steal. It is a respect to other's properties and the right to own property. If something is not given, one may not take it away by stealing, by force or by fraud. Besides these, one should avoid misusing money or property belonging to the public or other persons. In a broader sense, the second precept also means that one should not evade one’s responsibilities. If an employee is lazy and neglects the duties or tasks assigned to him, he is, in a way, "stealing" time that should have been spent on his work.
In its broadest sense, observing the second precept also means that one cultivates the virtue of generosity. A Buddhist gives to the poor and sick because of their need. He makes offerings to the monks, nuns and masters because he respects the qualities they possess. He is generous in his gifts to his parents, teachers and friends because of the advice, guidance and kindness they have shown him.
Besides giving material things to the needy and the worthy, Buddhists should also offer sympathy and encouragement to those who are hurt or discouraged. It is said, however, that the best of all gifts is the gift of the Dharma in the form of teaching it or in the production and distribution of Buddhist books.
Greed is one of the Three Poisons, which leads us to attachment and suffering. The bad effect of stealing are poverty, misery, disappointment, etc.
3) No sexual misconduct like committing adultery which damage relationships, inflict harm to oneself and others; lead to loss of harmony in family etc.
4) No false speech. To refrain from telling lies is to show respect for the truth. No good can come from telling lies, be it out of fun or malice. When a Buddhist observes the fourth precept, he refrains from telling lies or half-truths that exaggerate or understate, and instead cultivates the virtue of truthfulness. Once people uphold the respect for truth, there will be fewer quarrels and misunderstandings and fewer cases of false accusations in the courts of justice. Society will then become more peaceful and orderly.
5) No intoxicants. Buddhism emphasises wisdom. Taking intoxicant will descend and lose the seed of wisdom. Intoxicants, such as drugs, liquor, smoking, etc., are harmful to health. It seems that taking intoxicant is not hurting others. However, if we are drunk and lose our consciousness, we may easily commit evil deeds and hurt others. Therefore, one who breaks this precept will tend to break all other precepts along with it.
The fifth precept is based on respect for mental health. It guard against the loss of control of one’s mind. It is particularly important to those who meditate because, by refraining from taking intoxicants, they can more easily cultivate awareness, attention and clarity of mind. Thus the observance of the fifth precept not only contributes to happiness in the family and peace in society, it also prepares a person for the practice of Mental Development.
Life may not be clear-cut sometime and there may not be a standard model solution to answer all questions but generally observing the 5 precepts are basic guideline. Right view will arise when we cultivated morality, samadhi and wisdom.
Agreed with 5 percepts, but then it was handed down many many hundreds years ago. How about smoking? It was not stated in the percepts.
Originally posted by Weychin:Hunger has two components, physical and mental.
Physical hunger has to be addressed physically, like the poverty stricken Haitians, who ate mud to supplement their diet. Nutritionally not ideal, but help keeps the stomach full.
I not sure exactly, but, the gastric pains it not independantly attributted to hunger or lack of food. People who have gastric pains usually leads a hectic and stressfull live style.
There are yogis who meditated and fasted for long periods of time, probably have to check with them whether or not they develop gastric pains! Heh!Heh!
So physical hunger cannot be satisfied by mental training alone, is that what you are trying to say?
The gastric pain was just one easy but not necessarily very relevant example I could think of.
In fact I am interested in the limits of the spiritual practitioners with regards to hunger. Whether they develop gastric pains or not is not my main concern. But won't mind taking in those information if they come up.
Originally posted by likeyou:Agreed with 5 percepts, but then it was handed down many many hundreds years ago. How about smoking? It was not stated in the percepts.
Drugs and liquor do affect the judgment of one's mind. That's almost indisputable. But smoking I'm not so sure. With smoking bans and non-smoking designated areas slowly or quickly being the norm in Singapore, I'm not so sure how taking up smoking or continue with the smoking habit can be construed as breaking the precept on intoxicants.
Which is why it is up to us, Buddhists of the modern times, to discuss this again and again (there are other issues which require consideration after taking into account modern developments in human behaviour and values), from various perspectives and arrive at our own reasonable conclusions and life-binding decisions.
Thanks!
There are strong warnings by some Buddhist masters that smoking can actually block certain channels and thus prevent consciousness from taking rebirth in higher realms.
http://www.dudjom-on-smoking.org/index_eng.php
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:There are strong warnings by some Buddhist masters that smoking can actually block certain channels and thus prevent consciousness from taking rebirth in higher realms.
http://www.dudjom-on-smoking.org/index_eng.php
Is it? That is new to me.
Thanks.
Originally posted by Spnw07:So physical hunger cannot be satisfied by mental training alone, is that what you are trying to say?
The gastric pain was just one easy but not necessarily very relevant example I could think of.
In fact I am interested in the limits of the spiritual practitioners with regards to hunger. Whether they develop gastric pains or not is not my main concern. But won't mind taking in those information if they come up.